When Microsoft bought task management app Wunderlist and mobile calendar Sunrise in 2015. It picked up two newcomers that were attracting considerable buzz in Silicon Valley. Microsoft’s own Office dominates the market for “productivity” software, but the start-ups represented a new wave of technology designed from the ground up for the smartphone world.

Both apps, however, were later scrapped, after Microsoft said it had used their best features in its own products. Their teams of engineers stayed on, making them two of the many “acqui-hires” that the biggest companies have used to feed their insatiable hunger for tech-talent.

To Microsoft’s critics, the fates of Wunderlist and Sunrise are examples of a remorseless drive by Big Tech to chew up any innovative companies that lie in their path. “They bought the seedlings and closed them down,” complained Paul Arnold, a partner at San Francisco-based Switch Ventures, putting an end to businesses that might one day turn into competitors. Microsoft declined to comment.

Like other start-up investors. Mr. Arnold’s own business often depends on selling start-ups to larger tech companies, though he admits to mixed feelings about the result: “I think these things are good for me, if I put my selfish hat on. But are they good for the American economy? I don’t know.”

The US Federal Trade Commission says it wants to find the answer to that question. This week, it asked the five most valuable US tech companies for information about their many small acquisitions over the past decade. Although only a research project at this stage, the request has raised the prospect of regulators wading into early-stage tech markets that until now have been beyond their reach.

Given their combined market value of more than $5.5tn, rifling through such small deals—many of them much less prominent than Wunderlist and Sunrise—might seem beside the point. Between them, the five companies (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon and Facebook) have spent an average of only $3.4bn a year on sub-$1bn acquisitions over the past five years—a drop in the ocean compared with their massive financial reserves, and the more than $130bn of venture capital that was invested in the US last year.

However, critics say that the big companies use such deals to buy their most threatening potential competitors before their businesses have a chance to gain momentum, in some cases as part of a “buy and kill” tactic to simply close them down.

1.What is true about Wunderlist and Sunrise after their acquisitions?

A Their engineers were retained.

B Their market values declined.

C Their tech features improved.

D Their products were re-priced.

解析：选A。A 细节理解题。根据第二段可知，Wunderlist和Sunrise被收购后都被废弃了，而其工程师则被留了下来，A符合原文，故选A。

2.Microsoft’s critics believe that the big tech companies tend to _________.

A exaggerate their product quality

B eliminate their potential competitors

C treat new tech talent unfairly

D ignore public opinions

解析：选B。B 细节理解题。根据Microsoft’s critics定位到第三段，可知批评者认为大型科技公司是在无情地打击在其发展道路上存在的创新公司，那些创新公司可能有朝一日会成为他们的竞争对手，即大型科技公司是在排除潜在的竞争对手，B符合题意，故选B。

3.Paul Arnold is concerned that small acquisitions might _________.

A weaken big tech companies

B worsen market competition

C harm the national economy

D discourage start-up investors

解析：选C。C 细节理解题。由Paul Arnold定位到第三和四段，根据第四段可知阿诺德表示虽然收购初创企业对自己有好处，但他担忧是否对美国经济有好处，C符合原文，故选C。

4.The US Federal Trade Commission intends to _________.

A limit Big Tech’s expansion

B encourage research collaboration

C examine small acquisitions

D supervise start-ups’ operations

解析：选C。C 细节理解题。根据US Federal Trade Commission定位到第五段，可知美国联邦贸易委员会询问了美国五家科技公司关于它们在过去十年里所进行的所有小规模收购信息，以探究这种小规模收购是否会对美国经济不利，可见美国联邦贸易委员会打算审查大型科技公司收购初创企业的行为，故选C。

5.For the five biggest tech companies, their small acquisitions have _________.

A brought little financial pressure

B raised few management challenges

C set an example for future deals

D generated considerable profits

解析：选A。A 推理判断题。根据第六段可知，这些公司的总市值超过5.5万亿美元，而这些小规模收购和它们大规模的金融储备相比，就像是大海里的一滴水，显得无关紧要，即这些小规模收购并没给它们带来多大的财政压力，A符合原文，故选A。